scholarly journals Gatekeeping disability income support: A conceptual model

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 327-344
Author(s):  
Ashley McAllister
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Model ◽  
Income Support ◽  
Disability Income

Mental illnesses are not an ‘ideal type’ of disability for disability income support: Perceptions of policymakers in Australia and Canada

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 452-459 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley Mcallister
Keyword(s):  
Grounded Theory ◽  
Ideal Type ◽  
Mental Illnesses ◽  
Constructivist Grounded Theory ◽  
Medical Illness ◽  
Theory Approach ◽  
Income Support ◽  
The Disabled ◽  
Disability Income ◽  
Grounded Theory Approach

Aim: This article aims to explore how policymakers conceptualise a person suitable for disability income support (DIS) and how this compares across two settings – Australia and Canada. Methods: A constructivist grounded theory approach was used; 45 policymakers in Australia and Canada were interviewed between March 2012 and September 2013. All policymakers are or were influential in the design or assessment of DIS. Results: Results found that the policymakers in both jurisdictions define a suitable person as having as an ‘ideal type’ of disability with five features – visibility, diagnostic proof, permanency, recognition as a medical illness and perceived as externally caused. Many of the policymakers described how mental illnesses are not an ‘ideal type’ of disability for DIS by juxtaposing the features of mental illnesses against physical illnesses. As such, mental illnesses were labelled imperfect disabilities and physical illnesses as ‘ideal type’ for DIS. Conclusions: The rise of DIS recipients has divided the once protected ‘deserving’ category of the disabled into more (‘ideal type’ of disability) and less deserving (imperfect disability). Such conceptualisations are important because these categories can influence the allocation of welfare resources.

Distrusting doctors’ evidence: a qualitative study of disability income support policy makers

2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 475 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley McAllister ◽  
Stephen R. Leeder
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Tests ◽  
Mental Illnesses ◽  
Income Support ◽  
Snowball Sampling ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Diagnostic Certainty ◽  
Support Policy ◽  
Disability Income

Objective The aim of the present study was to describe how policy makers (bureaucrats and politicians) in Australia and Ontario (Canada) perceive evidence provided by doctors to substantiate applications for disability income support (DIS) by their patients with mental illnesses. Because many mental illnesses (e.g. depression) lack diagnostic tests, their existence and effects are more difficult to demonstrate than most somatic illnesses. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 45 informants, all influential in the design of the assessment of DIS programs. The informants were subcategorised into advocates, legal representatives, doctors (general practitioners (GPs) and specialists (e.g. psychiatrists)), policy insiders and researchers. Informants were found through snowball sampling. Following the principles of grounded theory, data collection and analysis occurred in tandem. Results Informants expressed some scepticism about doctors’ evidence. Informants perceived that doctors could, due to lack of diagnostic certainty, ‘write these things [evidence] however [they] want to’. Psychiatrists, perceived as having more time and skills, were considered as providing more trustworthy evidence than GPs. Conclusion Doctors, providing evidence to support applications, play an important role in determining disability. However, policy makers perceive doctors’ evidence about mental illnesses as less trustworthy than evidence about somatic illnesses. This affects decisions by government adjudicators. What is known about the topic? Doctors (GPs and psychiatrists) are often asked to provide evidence to substantiate a DIS application for those with mental illnesses. We know little about the perception of this evidence by the policy makers who consider these applications. What does this paper add? Policy makers distrust doctors’ evidence in relation to mental illnesses. This is partly because many mental illnesses lack diagnostic proof, in contrast with evidence for somatic conditions, where the disability is often visible and proven through diagnostic tests. Furthermore, GPs’ evidence is considered less trustworthy than that of psychiatrists. What are the implications for practitioners? Although doctors’ evidence is often required, the utility of their evidence is limited by policy makers’ perceptions.

scholarly journals Uncertain Subjects: Shaping Disabled Women’s Lives Through Income Support Policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 78-103
Author(s):  
Sally A. Kimpson
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Conditions ◽  
Support Program ◽  
Income Support ◽  
Disabled People ◽  
Doctoral Research ◽  
The Everyday ◽  
Disabled Women ◽  
Women's Lives ◽  
Support Policy ◽  
Disability Income

This article provides a critical reading of one aspect of the “third mobilization of transinstitutionalization” (Haley & Jones, 2018), focused on how power is exercised through the B.C. government income support program (or the ambiguously-named B.C. Benefits), shaping the embodied lives of women living with chronic physical and mental impairments. I research and write as a woman living with a disabling chronic illness whose explicit focus is power: how it is enacted and what it produces in the everyday lives of women with disabling chronic conditions living on income support. I too have been the recipient of disability income support. Thus, my accounts are ‘interested.’ My writing seeks to create a disruptive reading that destabilizes common-sense notions about disabled women securing provincial income support benefits, in particular in British Columbia (B.C.), interviewed as part of my doctoral research. Despite public claims by the B.C. government to foster the independence, community participation, and citizenship of disabled people in B.C., the intersection of government policy and practices and how they are read and taken up by disabled women discipline them in ways that produce profound uncertainty in their lives, such that these women become uncertain subjects (Kimpson, 2015).

scholarly journals Five Challenges of Designing Disability Income Support for People with Mental Illnesses: A Qualitative Case Study of Australia and Ontario

2017 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 109-126
Author(s):  
Ashley McAllister
Keyword(s):  
Grounded Theory ◽  
Policy Design ◽  
Qualitative Case Study ◽  
Mental Illnesses ◽  
Theory Approach ◽  
Income Support ◽  
Vulnerable Group ◽  
Disability Income ◽  
Grounded Theory Approach

In most disability income support (DIS) programs, mental illnesses is the fastest growing category of illness, but it is unknown how policy designers consider this vulnerable group. Forty-five DIS policy designers in Australia and Ontario explained how they consider mental illnesses when designing policy. Using a grounded theory approach, five challenges emerged: validating duration, proving an illness, (un)differentiating mental illnesses, managing mental illnesses, and separating the person from the illness. Each challenge is described and compared across Australia and Ontario. These challenges provide a framework for other settings to determine how well their DIS policies have considered mental illnesses in policy design.

Saskatchewan Disability Income Support Coalition:

2017 ◽  
pp. 110-139
Author(s):  
KATHLEEN THOMPSON ◽  
BONNIE MORTON
Keyword(s):  
Income Support ◽  
Disability Income

Early Intervention Services for Psychosis and Time Until Application for Disability Income Support: A Survival Analysis

2012 ◽  
Vol 48 (5) ◽  
pp. 535-546 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terry Krupa ◽  
Kola Oyewumi ◽  
Suzanne Archie ◽  
J. Stuart Lawson ◽  
Joan Nandlal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Analysis ◽  
Early Intervention ◽  
Income Support ◽  
Early Intervention Services ◽  
Intervention Services ◽  
Disability Income

The Ontario Disability Support Program Work Exit Process: Parallels to a Hostage Negotiation

2020 ◽  
pp. 104420732094460
Author(s):  
Pamela Lahey ◽  
Bonnie Kirsh ◽  
Emile Tompa ◽  
Joy MacDermid ◽  
Rebecca E. Gewurtz
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Support Program ◽  
Theory Approach ◽  
Income Support ◽  
Welfare To Work ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
People With Mental Illness ◽  
Disability Support ◽  
Disability Income

There is a lack of empirical data on the experiences of people with mental illness (PMI) who transition from welfare to work, or how policy programs are designed to facilitate this outcome. We explore the factors that facilitate or hinder PMI from exiting disability income support programs in Ontario, Canada. Drawing on a grounded theory approach, we examine the process of exiting the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP). Data were collected from semi-structured interviews with current and former recipients with mental illness, service providers who support current and former recipients, and ministry staff. A metaphor for the work exit process emerged with four embedded themes: (a) picking yourself back up, (b) breaking the rules to get ahead, (c) stabilizing illness for employment success, and (d) displaying resiliency and resourcefulness for successful exits. The main finding is that system supports are not the determining factors in a successful transition. Rather, participants describe how recipients exit for employment by leveraging personal resources to successfully transition off income support benefits. A system redesign is needed to address the inherent tension between social and health programs if the policy intent is to promote successful welfare-to-work transitions for PMI.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document